aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.cpp
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.cpp')
-rw-r--r--llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.cpp12
1 files changed, 11 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.cpp b/llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.cpp
index 570d960..bc9aab3 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.cpp
@@ -727,9 +727,19 @@ bool TargetLibraryInfoImpl::isValidProtoForLibFunc(const FunctionType &FTy,
LibFunc F,
const DataLayout *DL) const {
LLVMContext &Ctx = FTy.getContext();
+ // FIXME: There is really no guarantee that sizeof(size_t) is equal to
+ // sizeof(int*) for every target. So the assumption used here to derive the
+ // SizeTTy based on DataLayout and getIntPtrType isn't always valid.
Type *SizeTTy = DL ? DL->getIntPtrType(Ctx, /*AddressSpace=*/0) : nullptr;
auto IsSizeTTy = [SizeTTy](Type *Ty) {
- return SizeTTy ? Ty == SizeTTy : Ty->isIntegerTy();
+ // FIXME: For uknown historical reasons(?) we use a relaxed condition saying
+ // that any integer type may size_t, for example if we got no
+ // DataLayout. This seems like a potentially error prone relaxation (or why
+ // should we only be more strict and checking the exact type when we have a
+ // DataLayout?).
+ if (!SizeTTy)
+ return Ty->isIntegerTy();
+ return Ty == SizeTTy;
};
unsigned NumParams = FTy.getNumParams();